alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2021242EN.01002601.xml

| 21.6.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 242/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.6.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 242/26

---

Judgment of the General Court of 28 April 2021 — Asolo v EUIPO — Red Bull (FLÜGEL)

(Case T-509/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark FLÜGEL - Earlier national word marks ... VERLEIHT FLÜGEL and RED BULL VERLEIHT FLÜÜÜGEL - Relative grounds for refusal - Damage to reputation - Article 8(5) and Article 52(1)(a) of Regulation No 40/94 (now Article 8(5) and Article 60(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Right to be heard - Article 70(2) and Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)

(2021/C 242/33)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Asolo LTD (Limassol, Cyprus) (represented by: W. Pors and N. Dorenbosch, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Capostagno and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Red Bull GmbH (Fuschl am See, Austria) (represented by: A. Renck and S. Petivlasova, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 15 May 2019 (Case R 201/2019-4), relating to invalidity proceedings between Red Bull and Asolo.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Asolo LTD to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Asolo LTD to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 295, 2.9.2019.

---
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Alberto Montez, True Name Alberto Montez-Gaviria, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Leahy, J.), rendered November 29,1982, convicting him of manslaughter in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

By failing to move to withdraw his guilty plea, defendant has failed to preserve for appellate review the issue of the sufficiency of the allocution *(see, People v Pellegrino,*60 NY2d 636; *People v Lawrence,*100 AD2d 944; *People v Mattocks,*100 AD2d 944) and review in the interest of justice is not warranted. Moreover, the defendant, “by pleading guilty prior to a decision on his suppression motion, waived final determination of the motion, and thus failed to preserve any suppression issue for appellate review” *(People v Corti,*88 AD2d 345,347). Defendant’s claims of ineffectiveness of counsel require the making of an additional record, and should be determined by way of a collateral or postconviction proceeding pursuant to CPL 440.10 *(see, People v Lawrence, supra; People v Drummond,*99 AD2d 760). Finally, we note that inasmuch as defendant received the sentence for which he bargained, he has no basis to complain that the sentence was excessive *(see, People v Kazepis,*101 AD2d 816). Lazer, J. P., Gibbons, O’Connor and Brown, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>

                                  EXHIBIT 32.2


                      CERTIFICATION OF THE CFO PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with this Report of Sturgis Bancorp, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-K for the period ended December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Brian P. Hoggatt,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section
1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:

        1.      The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a)
                or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

        2.      The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
                material respects, the financial condition and results of
                operations of the Company.



Date   March 25, 2004          /s/
       --------------          -------------------------------------------------
                               Brian P. Hoggatt, Chief Financial Officer
June 12, 2001


EXHIBIT 10.2



December 1, 2009



 

Lynn Utter

East Greenville, PA



Dear Lynn:

It is my pleasure to inform you that you will be a participant in the 2010 Knoll, Inc. Incentive Compensation Program. 

In these challenging times, our objectives are simple and something that each of us can help contribute to:

Protect our balance sheet and profitability while ensuring that we make the right investments in products, service and technology to position Knoll for long term success as demand eventually recovers. 

Our success in 2010 and beyond will be a direct result of your ability to help us accomplish these long term goals while meeting our short term 2010 operating profit plan. 

If you achieve your individual goals and Knoll makes its 2010 operating profit plan, you can qualify for a total target incentive payment of $500,000.

This award is subject to my approval and that of the Knoll, Inc. Board of Directors (or appropriate committee of the Knoll, Inc. Board of Directors), which may exercise discretion in adjusting your award up or down based on factors the Board of Directors (or appropriate committee of the Knoll, Inc. Board of Directors) deems appropriate, including Knoll's performance relative to the industry, other macroeconomic factors and your individual performance.  You must be employed by Knoll on the date this award is distributed in order to receive this incentive.

I have great confidence in your ability to contribute to our success in 2010 and look forward to being able to present you with your award in early 2011. 

Thank you for all that you do for Knoll.

Sincerely,

/s/ Andrew B. Cogan

Andrew B. Cogan

CEO
# United States Court of Appeals

For the Seventh Circuit

Chicago, Illinois 60604

January 26, 2010



### Before

F RANK H. E ASTERBROOK

, Chief Judge

W ILLIAM J. B AUER

, Circuit Judge

I LANA D IAMOND R OVNER

, Circuit Judge



### No s

. 09

- 8046 and 09

- 8047

S ANDRA B ERGQUIST

, Plaintiff

- Respondent

,

v.

M ANN B RACKEN

, LLP, and FIA C ARD S ERVICES

, N.A.,

Defendants

- Petitioners

. Appeal from the United

States District Court for the

Northern District of Illinois

, Eastern Division.

No. 09 C 5056

Harry D. Lein enweber

, Judge

.

Order

The slip opinion of this court issued on January 26, 2010, is amended as follows:

Page 2, l ine 6, change “whether” to “how ”

.
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1



                          ANNUAL SERVICER'S CERTIFICATE
                               NATIONAL CITY BANK
                   NATIONAL CITY AUTO RECEIVABLES TRUST 2002-A



The undersigned, a duly authorized representative of National City Bank
("National City"), as Servicer pursuant to the Sale and Servicing Agreement
dated as of March 1, 2002, as amended and supplemented from time to time (the
"Agreement"), between National City, as Seller, Servicer, Administrator and
Custodian, The Bank of New York, as Indenture Trustee, National City Auto
Receivables Trust 2002-A, as Issuer, and National City Vehicle Receivables Inc.,
as Depositor, does hereby certify as follows:

         1.       Capitalized terms used in this Certificate have their
                  respective meanings as set forth in the Agreement.

         2.       National City is, as of the date hereof, the Servicer under
                  the Agreement.

         3.       The undersigned is an officer of National City who is duly
                  authorized pursuant the Agreement to execute and deliver this
                  Certificate to the Indenture Trustee.

         4.       This Certificate relates to the activities of the Servicer for
                  January 1, 2004 through December 31, 2004 and a review of such
                  activities and of the Servicer's performance of its
                  obligations under the Agreement was conducted under my
                  supervision.

         5.       Based on such review, to the best knowledge of the
                  undersigned, the Servicer has performed in all material
                  respects all its obligations under the Agreement through the
                  above period and no default in the performance of such
                  obligations has occurred or it continuing.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed and delivered this
Certificate this 31st day of March, 2005.


                                        NATIONAL CITY BANK
                                        As Servicer



                                        By: /s/ Richard G. Zab
                                           ----------------------------
                                           Name:  Richard G. Zab
                                           Title: Senior Vice President
#### Clemm *v.*The State.

*'Grand Larceny.*

(Decided Dec. 19, 1907.

45 South. 212.)

*Larceny; Property of Different Persons; Indictment.*— Where different articles of property belonging .to different persons are stolen at the same time and place the offense is single and should be laid in one count; but the indictment should show affirmatively that the different articles belonging to different persons were taken at the same time and place.

*13Appeal from Jefferson Criminal C'onrt.

Heard before Hon. Dan A. Greene.

Rufus Clemm was convicted of larceny, and lie appeals.

Reversed and remanded.

The indictment was in the following language: “The grand jury of said county charges that before the finding of this indictment Rufus Clemm feloniously took and carried away nine windows, consisting of glass and sash, of the aggregate value of fifteen dollars and seventy-five cents the personal property of the Gray & Dudley Hardware Company, a body corporate, and one lot of lumber, a particular description of which is unknown to the grand jury, of the value of twenty-five dollars, the personal property of Charles M. Allen,” etc. Demurrers were interposed to this indictment as follows: “(1) It appears from said indictment that two offenses are alleged in the same count of the indictment. (2) There is a misjoinder, in that the ownership of a part of the property is laid in- the Gray & Dudley Hardware Company and the other in C. M. Allen. (3) Said indictment is vague, indefinite, and uncertain.” These demurrers were overruled, and the defendant convicted.

Lea & Conniff, for appellant.

The indictment was subject to the *demurrers.-*— Adams *v.The State,*55 Ala. 143; *James v. The State,*104 Ala. 27; *Thomas v. The State,*111 Ala. 51; *Meadows v. The State,*136 Ala. 67. There is no evidence of the value of the articles stolen. *—Booker v. The State,*44 South. 56.

Alexander M. Garber, Attorney General, for the State.

TYSON, C. J.

-The rule is well established that, when articles of property belonging to different owners are stolen at the same time and place, the offense is sin*14gle and must be charged in the same *count.*— State *v. Dalton*(Miss.) 44 South. 802, and authorities there cited] 22 Cyc. 383 and note. But to come within this rule the averments of the count should affirmatively. show that the property of the different owners was stolen at the same time and place. Good pleading requires this, in order to exclude the intendment, which must be indulged on demurrer, to avoid the objection so taken, that two distinct larcenies were committed. The .averment of the indictment in this case was faulty in that respect, and the demurrer to it should have been sustained.

Reversed and remanded.

Haralson, Simpson, and Denson, JJ., concur.
IV 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. CON. RES. 26 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 28, 2011 

Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Supporting the goals and ideals of the designation of the 

year of 2011 as the International Year for People of 

African Descent. 

Whereas the year of 2011 is recognized as the ‘‘International 

Year for People of African Descent’’; 

Whereas the African Diaspora is expansive, spanning the 

globe from Latin America and the Caribbean to Asia, 

with persons of African descent living on every continent, 

including Europe; 

Whereas in recognition of the African Diaspora, on December 

18, 2009, the United Nations General Assembly adopted 

Resolution 64/169, designating the year of 2011 as the 

‘‘International Year for People of African Descent’’; 

Whereas the historical bonds and shared experiences that tie 

the African continent with the world must be recalled; 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

SCON 26 RFH 

Whereas the global contributions of people of African descent 

must be recognized as a means of preserving that heritage; 

Whereas a central goal of recognizing the year of 2011 as the 

International Year for People of African descent is to 

strengthen national actions and regional and international cooperation for the benefit of people of African 

descent in relation to— 

(1) the full enjoyment of economic, cultural, social, 

civil, and political rights for people of African descent; 

(2) the participation and integration of people of African descent in all political, economic, social, and cultural aspects of society; and 

(3) the promotion of greater knowledge of, and respect for, the diverse heritage and culture of people of 

African descent; and 

Whereas the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, done at Helsinki August 1, 1975, 

states that ‘‘participating States will respect human 

rights and fundamental freedoms . . . for all without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion’’: Now, 

therefore, be it 

1 Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 

2 concurring), That Congress— 

3 (1) supports the goals and ideals of the des4 ignation of the year of 2011 as the International 

5 Year for People of African Descent; 

6 (2) encourages the recognition and celebration 

7 of the collective history and achievements made by 

8 people of African descent; 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
3 

SCON 26 RFH 

1 (3) reaffirms the importance of inclusion and 

2 the full and equal participation of people of African 

3 descent around the world in all aspects of political, 

4 economic, social, and cultural life; 

5 (4) recognizes bilateral and multilateral efforts 

6 to promote democracy, human rights, and rule of 

7 law, including those efforts that target the eradi8 cation of poverty, hunger, and inequality; and 

9 (5) reaffirms the commitment of Congress to 

10 address racism, discrimination, and intolerance in 

11 the United States and around the globe. 

Passed the Senate 

Attest: NANCY ERICKSON, 

Secretary. 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
# C_2019288EN.01002901.xml

| 26.8.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 288/29 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.8.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 288/29

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel București (Romania) lodged on 29 May 2019 — Cabinet de avocat UR v Administrația Sector 3 a Finanțelor Publice prin Direcția Generală Regională a Finanțelor Publice București and Others

(Case C-424/19)

(2019/C 288/36)

Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Curtea de Apel București

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant and appellant: Cabinet de avocat UR

Defendants and respondents: Administrația Sector 3 a Finanțelor Publice prin Direcția Generală Regională a Finanțelor Publice București, Administrația Sector 3 a Finanțelor Publice, MJ, NK

Questions referred

| 1. | In the context of the application of Article 9(1) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC (on the common system of value added tax), (1) does the concept of ‘taxable person’ include persons who practice the profession of lawyer? |
| --- | --- |

1.

In the context of the application of Article 9(1) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC (on the common system of value added tax), (1) does the concept of ‘taxable person’ include persons who practice the profession of lawyer?

| 2. | Does the principle of the primacy of EU law permit an exception to be made, in subsequent proceedings, to the authority of res judicata attaching to a final judicial decision in which it has been established, in essence, that, in accordance with national value added tax legislation, as it is interpreted and applied, lawyers do not supply goods, do not carry out an economic activity and do not conclude contracts for the supply of services, but instead conclude contracts for legal assistance? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Does the principle of the primacy of EU law permit an exception to be made, in subsequent proceedings, to the authority of res judicata attaching to a final judicial decision in which it has been established, in essence, that, in accordance with national value added tax legislation, as it is interpreted and applied, lawyers do not supply goods, do not carry out an economic activity and do not conclude contracts for the supply of services, but instead conclude contracts for legal assistance?

---

(1)  Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1).

---
Exhibit 32.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Annual Report of Technology Flavors & Fragrances, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2003, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Joseph A. Gemmo, Chief Financial Officer certify, to the best of my
knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, 0f 2002:

     1.   The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or
          15 (d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934; as amended; and

     2.   The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
          material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
          of the Company.


Date: March 17, 2004


/s/ Joseph A. Gemmo
------------------------
Chief Financial Officer



NOTE: A signed original of this certification has been provided to the Company
and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.


                                       25
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 USC SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K
of Medallion Financial Corp. (the Company) for the year ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 USC
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, based on my knowledge:

(1) The Report
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2) The information contained
in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of the dates and for the periods expressed in the Report.



|                        |  |                   
|----------------------- |  | ------------------
|                        | 
|By:                     |  | /s/ Alvin Murstein
|Chairman and           
|Chief Executive Officer

Date: March 10, 2011
Exhibit 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation
by reference in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) of Syniverse Holdings, Inc. of our report dated March 11, 2008, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Syniverse Holdings, Inc., included in the 2007 Annual Report to Shareholders of
Syniverse Holdings, Inc.

Our audits also included the financial statement schedule of Syniverse Holdings, Inc. listed in Item 15(a).
These schedules are the responsibility of Syniverse Holdings, Inc.s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion based on our audits. In our opinion, as to which the date is March 11, 2008, the financial statement schedule referred
to above, when considered in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole, presents fairly in all material respects the information set forth therein.

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the following Registration Statements:



| | (1) | Registration Statement (Form S-8, No. 333-124866) of Syniverse Holdings, Inc.,
| | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | Registration Statement (Form S-8, No. 333-134057) of Syniverse Holdings, Inc.,
| | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (3) | Registration Statement (Form S-3, No. 333-143631) of Syniverse Holdings, Inc.;
| | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

of our reports dated March 11, 2008, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Syniverse Holdings, Inc. and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of Syniverse Holdings, Inc. included in this Annual
Report (Form 10-K) of Syniverse Holdings, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2007.

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Tampa, Florida

March 11, 2008
**Exhibit32.2**

 

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEFFINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

 

I, Stephen T. Lanza, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that theQuarterly Report of NeoMagic Corporation on Form 10-Q for the quarterly periodended July 27, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained insuch Quarterly Report fairly presents in all material respects the financialcondition and results of operations of NeoMagic Corporation.

 
|   | By:    | /s/ Stephen T. Lanza    |   |
|--------|--------|-------------------------|--------|
|   | Name:  | Stephen T. Lanza        |
|   | Title: | Chief Financial Officer |
|        |        |                         |        |  |

 

----
# C_2020215EN.01003701.xml

| 29.6.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 215/37 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.6.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 215/37

---

Judgment of the General Court of 13 May 2020 — Pontinova v EUIPO — Ponti & Partners (pontinova)

(Case T-76/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark pontinova - Earlier national word mark PONTI - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Relevant public - Similarity of the services - Similarity of the signs - Global assessment of the likelihood of confusion)

(2020/C 215/45)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Pontinova AG (Zurich, Switzerland) (represented by: L. Röh, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Ponti & Partners, SLP (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: R. Guerras Mazón, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 27 November 2018 (Case R 566/2018 5), relating to opposition proceedings between Ponti & Partners and Pontinova.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Pontinova AG to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Pontinova AG to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 122, 1.4.2019.

---